Cash Flow vs. Appreciation

Cash Flow vs. Appreciation

Will BarnardPro Member
Moderator
Developer · Santa Clarita, CA · Member since 2008 · 15k+ posts · 10k+ votes

Many have argued/claimed here on BP that cash flow on residential properties is of vital importance and investors can not put food on the table with appreciation. I disagree. Once you have built a business with many rentals, you could sell one or two, or as many as necessary each year grabbing the gains from it to live off. This is not to say that you should not have positive cash flow on residential properties, you should. Only to say that it is not the only income source form the property.

Another claim is that you must buy at huge discounts to turn a profit in residential RE. Although I agree getting a huge discount is advantageous, it is not the ONLY way. Just because you buy a sfr for $30k and it appraises for $50k, does not assure you have 40% equity, nor does it assure you will turn a profit on the sell down the road. In fact, in many cases, the $30k you paid is all it is really worth and the so called equity in that area will vanish. What is important is the demographic studies: Strong diverse economy, strong job grwoth, improvement in infrastructure, strong potential appreciation, reduced vacancy trends, ratio of supply & demand, and an undervalued market.

I have read here that some buy in lower income areas at 60% of the current value in places that show poor demographics where population is decreasing and jobs are leaving. So just because you can buy at 60% of value today and turn positive cash flow, does not assure a profit down the road. Who will rent the unit when the supply beats demand and when there are no jobs.

I understand and believe that becoming wealthy from cash flow on residential properties is most likely not going to happen. True wealth is obtained from the appreciation and many tax benefits from residential RE investing. Although I beleive in cash flow, and always strive for it, the true ultimate goal is to eventually sell the residential property for large gains and defer/avoid taxes as permitted by law.

Commercial property is where wealth and long term residual income lives. When purchasing a commercial property, in essence, you are buying the cash flow. In fact, it is valued based on it's performance and not what the unit down the street sold for (comps) like residential is.

3Reply
206 views

Most Popular Reply

Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
18y
Originally posted by "SROC4":
Or was it house rich but cash poor? :)

I think we're all cash poor.....lol. At least that's what I've seen with 99% of investors for the first 10 years. I've got a nice "pay day" coming up this weekend and already have the closing set up for next friday where I get to wave bye bye to all of it...lol For me, anything but positive cashflow just isn't an option for long term survival.

Honestly I know of one person who has the financial backing to take 6-10 years of negative cashflow. She's a multimillionaire heiress who already started is operating 3 businesses that cashflow extremely well and has an incredible mind for money (I need to marry this girl). In her case she's buying prime beachfront property now that doesn't cashflow well but she's getting it at 60-70 fmv and is playing speculation. If you're in a position to inherrent a fortune and have 3 businesses that are cashflowing very well, by all means go for it.

And btw, thank you Mike.

Tim

See this reply in the discussion

182 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Specialist · Riverside, CA · Member since 2008 · 382 posts · 72 votes
    18y

    There is only one one that I know of in California that is doing 10. Try Taylor Bean and Whitaker.

    www.taylorbean.com

    They are Nation Wide but there Georgia guidlines may be different. They appear to be the same on there page though. We have a few banks with a range from 6-10 but I think this will be your best bet. I hope it works out for you. I hate getting caught with my pants down.

  • Virtual Real Estate Investor · Santa Rosa Beach , FL · Member since 2008 · 76 posts · 77 votes
    18y

    I have to be honest with you. I am humbeld everytime I see or hear the name Tayor, Bean & Whitaker. They just happen to be one of the largest lenders in the nation and just happen to be from the small home town where I was born and raised, Ocala, Florida. I know exactly where their office is. I rode by it many times as a high school student on my 12 speed bicycle. You are correct, they have tended to remain on the cutting aggressive edge. I can't personally say what they are or are not doing today. I know they are conservatively aggressive. Or perhaps in this market, aggressively conservative. Unquestionably, a great firm that has weathered the recent storm. Few things would be sweeter than catapulting investments utilizing an Ocala hometown firm. Go TB&W!!! Keep the dream alive!!!

    I will inquire as to their understanding of the current Fannie/Freddie directives and see what they are willing to commit to purchasing in writing and post to this forum.

    Vincent Polisi
    The Wealth Consortium
    [LINK REMOVED]

  • Real Estate Investor · QLD · Member since 2008 · 67 posts · 5 votes
    18y

    It's interesting to hear that there are cultural differences in property investing, as well as in other endeavours. :wink: I'm a full-time investor in Australia, where cashflow positive property is virtually non-existent. In cities, gross yields tend to be from 2.5 to 4.5%. :shock: So investing in Australia is, of necessity, almost exclusively focused on anticipated appreciation.

    Many would say that yields are now unsustainably low and our market is set for a correction (and I agree), but even looking back over the past 40 years, our mainstream market has never been cashflow positive; the best it's done is come close to being neutral. But capital growth has been so reliable and strong that most investors have not been concerned about holding cashflow negative property for long periods of time.

    It's so interesting to hear so many of you say things like "appreciation doesn't put food on the table", because in Australia, investors rely on exactly that. :D The vast majority of property investors rely on cash-out refinancing to take profits. So one holds a property that is, perhaps, costing 6% per year to hold (rental income 4%, all cash outgoings 10%). After offsetting that loss against other income, it only costs, say, 3.5% in after-tax dollars, and of course depreciation improves the picture even further. So it may only cost 2.5% per year in post-tax dollars to hold, and growth averages about 10% in capital cities, so one is getting ahead by about 7.5% per year.

    Once one has a sizable portfolio, they simply have some or all of the portfolio re-valued every few years, and pull some extra cash out.

    So if I have $5M of property with $4M of debt (80% is standard here for residential), it will cost me about 2.5% (say) or $125,000 per year to hold it, but it goes up in value by 10%, or $500,000. At the end of the year, you have the portfolio re-valued at $5.5M, and you are then allowed to have a debt level of 80% of that value, or $4.4M, meaning there is $400,000 available for cashing out from your mortgage. That $400K funds the next couple of years' holding costs, at which time you get the portfolio revalued and repeat... And because you're not selling, no tax is payable on that $400K now, though you are accumulating a future capital gains tax debt.

    There are some investors in Australia who focus on cashflow positive property, but it's very much a niche and not the mainstream. (One of the reasons I'm headed for the USA! I'd like to use cashflow property in the USA to fund holding my growth properties in Australia.)

    I'm not seeking to refute what anybody has said; just highlighting that if you believe that a good property investment has to cashflow, then you would have made the decision not to invest in Australian residential property in 2002. Which would have been a shame, as you would have missed out on two booms, resulting in prices increasing about 2.5x in 6 years.

  • Virtual Real Estate Investor · Santa Rosa Beach , FL · Member since 2008 · 76 posts · 77 votes
    18y

    Ozperp:

    You provide an excellent example about the differences in real estate investing ideology. The same holds true in any boom market in the U.S. What isn't being mentioned in this post is the fact that MANY people made an absolute fortune investing ONLY in appreciation in Florida, California, Nevada (Las Vegas), Arizona and New York over the past 5 years. I know countless people who made hundreds of thousands of dollars from relatively small earnest money deposits on pre-construction properties via a simple assignment during construction (example, they put $60k down on a $300k pre-construction purchase only to assign the sale for $500k prior to completion of construction). This far offsets ANY potential cash flow and required absolutely NO carrying cost other than the "lost" opportunity cost of the money during the time of the investment. The key here is that this strategy relies on timing the market and not time in the market. Conversely, I also know many people who got destroyed utilizing this strategy on the tail end of the boom.
    Proponents of the "cash flow" is the only thing that makes a solid investment theory, in my opinion, are what true professional passive real estate investors call, property managers. Typically, these are the people who want to grind it out, be landlords, deal with maintenance and repair problems, and absolutely are relying on cash flow to survive because they have little else in reserves to fall back on. If that is your methodology, God Bless You. The challenge is that it totally discounts most of the benefits of real estate investing. Properly structured, you can 1031 exchange yourself into completely free and tax free multimillion dollar retirement homes that don't cash flow at all but provide incredible housing in later life in resort and/or waterfront areas. They provide reverse cash flow in the sense that they don't cost anything monthly.

    I think you have properly illustrated that every deal does not have to cash flow to make sense. They key is the financial holding power and patience to attain the return required to make the deal a solid investment. But after all, aren't patience and holding power the real key to any investment, even ones with cash flow?

  • Real Estate Investor · San Francisco, CA · Member since 2008 · 51 posts · 0 votes
    18y

    It's nice to see so many different points of view. As I mentioned in my previous posts, I would like to emphasize to all the newbies to focus on investing in cash flowing properties to build your base. Once you have a solid base or hit critical mass, you can then invest for appreciation to build up cash faster since you have money coming in to sustain those appreciation plays. This way you avoid shelling money out of your own pocket to hold on to non cash flowing properties. As mentioned above you can do a 1031 exchange and pay your next purchase outright or bank roll your gains into a bigger property. It's basically a free loan from the government.

    Cash flow allows you to play the appreciation game...investng in appreciation still needs cash flow (any source) to keep you in the appreciation game.

  • Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y

    Quite the contrary, that's been said over and over, even in this thread. Here's a portion of my very first post on this threadl:

    You are exactly right. Market timing is speculation and is MUCH more risky than running a traditional cash flow rental business, although that is still a valid strategy. In addition, I would argue that it is almost always better to make your money when you buy, whether you're in the rental property business or the flipping business. Why buy a negative cash flow property and hold it for years hoping for appreciation when you could buy a property at a huge discount and flip it NOW for a large profit?

    Mike

  • Specialist · Riverside, CA · Member since 2008 · 382 posts · 72 votes
    18y

    Though it has been said many time in this thread, speculation is apart of investing but not all of it.

    If you have to pay a negative you can only weather the storm so long. What you want is at least small cash flow to start in a high appreciation area.

    If you at least break even you can hold the property as long as nessecary to let it appreciate. A negative cash flow with appreciation is a true buisness model but it is not as good as the latter. That being said, I will not buy out of state high cash flow properites with a tract record of low appreciation.

    You have to have both but negative cash flow is just not as good of a model. Why take the risk is the reward isn't any better.

  • Real Estate Investor · San Francisco, CA · Member since 2008 · 51 posts · 0 votes
    18y
    Originally posted by "Licwidsand":
    That being said, I will not buy out of state high cash flow properites with a tract record of low appreciation.

    I disagree because even though appreciation is slow, you build equity by paying down the principal on your mortgage. This still builds wealth in the long term.

  • Real Estate Investor · alexandria, VA · Member since 2008 · 26 posts · 5 votes
    18y

    In areas where the mortage does not give good cash flow. How many units should one have cash flowing and at what amount of positive cash flow should be a good number.

    I have found in the washington d.c. area. Many investors do not talk about more than 400 positive cash flow. I feel that this is not a good enough buffer against issues that could eat up positive cash flow.

  • Specialist · Riverside, CA · Member since 2008 · 382 posts · 72 votes
    18y

    SR0c4

    I don't disagree with paying dwon equity but can you find me an area that pays out a 100%+ return in 7-10 years with a small cash flow.

  • Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y

    $100 per unit per month is a good cash flow that is difficult to achieve in most areas. $400 positive cash flow per unit per month would be an outstanding cash flow on residential rentals. However, your statement that the $400 cash flow isn't enough of a buffer against issues that could eat up cash flow makes me believe that you're not really talking about $400 cash flow. Cash flow is what remains after all the expenses are paid, even those that don't occur frequently. If issues are eating into the cash flow, the cash flow calculation wasn't accurate in the first place.

    The truth is that the vast majority of new landlords fail in a relatively short period of time and they fail because they don't understand cash flow. You might want to use the search function of this forum to search for "cash flow" and "operating expenses".

    Good Luck,

    Mike

  • Real Estate Investor · San Francisco, CA · Member since 2008 · 51 posts · 0 votes
    18y
    Originally posted by "Licwidsand":
    SR0c4

    I don't disagree with paying dwon equity but can you find me an area that pays out a 100%+ return in 7-10 years with a small cash flow.

    There are a few places but I would be crazy to disclose that! :D

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y
    Originally posted by "Licwidsand":
    SR0c4

    I don't disagree with paying dwon equity but can you find me an area that pays out a 100%+ return in 7-10 years with a small cash flow.

    Off the top of my head these will work if you buy and manage right: Springfield, IL; Joplin, Missouri; Kansas City, Missouri (be careful here!), Tulsa, Oklahoma. 100% return on cashflow in 7-10 years is beyond easy to find if you look right for it, watch the taxes, don't over-improve and are actively interested in your properties' management. 7-10 years is easy. 2-3 years gets fun and no I won't disclose those.

    Tim

  • Specialist · Riverside, CA · Member since 2008 · 382 posts · 72 votes
    18y

    Hey Tim,

    Do you mean 100% based on the purchase price or cash in the deal. I'm looking for an average return not an unscheduled enomily. I have been doing some fo-investing following around the gas mine contracts and am about to dive into those areas as well. This is the only way I have found I have been able to beat california's returns.

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y
    Originally posted by "Licwidsand":
    Do you mean 100% based on the purchase price or cash in the deal. I'm looking for an average return not an unscheduled enomily. I have been doing some fo-investing following around the gas mine contracts and am about to dive into those areas as well. This is the only way I have found I have been able to beat california's returns.

    I mean purchase price (including rehab costs) and average return.

    Good luck on the gas mine contracts. I had a lot of those pitched at me at a recent real estate event but know nothing about it.

  • Specialist · Riverside, CA · Member since 2008 · 382 posts · 72 votes
    18y

    WOW, i'll have to do a little digging.

    As for the gas mine contracts I have inlaws that work them. Check out the last trends for Grand Junction Colorado and South of Little Rock Arkansas. Didn't know people were pitching that though.

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y

    It was something at the Learning Annex. They had oil wells and mentioned gas mine something with it as well. I don't get the whole oil/gas mining thing. My only strategy I know with anything fossil fuels would be the Jed Clampett approach - shoot the ground and see what happens.

  • Rental Property Investor · Mercer Island, WA · Member since 2008 · 22k+ posts · 14k+ votes
    18y

    I spent many years in oil and gas exploration and production. I've never heard of a "gas mine" except in the context of gas hydrates. AFAIK, nobody is mining gas hydrates commercially. Certainly not in Grand Junction. Gas wells, yes. That's a hot business these days, and is driving real estate prices in some places.

    This has diverged from the topic at hand, so if anyone would care to answer, I'll split this, the reply and Tim's post into a separate thread.

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y
    Originally posted by "Licwidsand":
    WOW, i'll have to do a little digging.

    If you do try to move into one of these midwest markets, call me first. Being from California, it's an unfair inevitability that you will get overcharged for something at some point. There are a few ways to keep it under control though.

  • Real Estate Investor · Bozeman, MT · Member since 2008 · 77 posts · 3 votes
    18y

    TWatson - your comment on the 20th has been our experience also. Our strategy has also been to buy cash flowing properties in emerging or recovering markets around the country; cash flow is king and the appreciation from the rising tide of the emerging market is the icing on the cake. Tracey's post detailing the Australian experience of late is again support that there's more than one way to skin this cat.

    What's been of great interest to us is the fact that market cycles for multifamily and single family are most often out of phase in these economic times - e.g. a good single family market is not necessarily a good multifamily market and vice versa.

    One of the great things about real estate investing is that there is no "one size fits all" approach to the game.

  • Specialist · Riverside, CA · Member since 2008 · 382 posts · 72 votes
    18y

    Wheatie: Thats what I meant, oil shale. From what I understand it has is a huge market now.

    If you want move this knock your self out bud.

    Tim: Thanks will do. It's funny we have that problem within the state. I can drive an hour and a half to the OC and charge 3 times for the same service.

  • Renter · Long Beach, CA · Member since 2008 · 78 posts · 2 votes
    18y

    I have a great job that I could do while traveling/RE investing. So, ignoring factors such as forced appreciation and very good deals, if I could choose from the following portfolios of investments:

    5 high cash flow properties with low future appreciation potential

    5 average cash flow properties, average future appreciation potential

    5 low cash flow properties, high future appreciation potential

    I would probably take 3 of the average properties and 2 of the low cash flow properties. Of course in real life we want to be selective so that we get a great deal on each side, but overall I think the best avenue for investors who do not need cash flow to survive is to lean to the speculative side.

    I see cash flow as the safety margin of the investment and would gladly give up a good bit of appreciation potential to have a solid buffer here for unforeseen market conditions. But by the same token the OP is right in that appreciation generates wealth, not cash flow. That is what we want to maximize, albeit without gambling.

  • Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y

    I find that fascinating. So, you would rather pay more for a rental in an area in hopes of future appreciation than buy a property at a huge discount and get instant appreciation. Is it better to pay retail for a property and hope it doubles or to buy a property at 50% of market value and get the double at closing?

    Mike

  • Renter · Long Beach, CA · Member since 2008 · 78 posts · 2 votes
    18y

    If you'll re-read my post I mentioned that forced appreciation was left out as a factor. (to compare future appreciation potential vs cash flow)

    Also the tone of my post was against overly aggressive speculation but you quoted me out of context.

  • Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    18y

    I understand that you left out forced appreciation as a factor, but unfortunately, that isn't realistic if you're considering buying at a discount to be "forced appreciation". There is almost no place in the United States that properties can be bought at retail (without forced appreciation) and still have them cash flow.

    So the choice is really:

    1. little or no equity and negative cash flow, but the hope of significant future appreciation

    2. significant instant equity and positive cash flow, but little chance of future appreciation beyond the inflation rate

    Either one is a valid business model, but I'd rather double my money NOW than lose money each month while hoping to double my money through appreciation in the future.

    We're really talking about two different businesses here. One business is the rental property business where you are holding the property over a long period of time and the money is primarily made with cash flow and wealth is created with the equity. The other business is a slow motion flipping business where you buy a rental property that loses money each month in negative cash flow in hopes that it can be sold at a profit in the future after it appreciates - i.e. slow motion flipping.

    Mike

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.